IN RE AMARTEIFIO (DECD.); AMARTEIFIO vs. AMARTEIFIO

The deceased, Bob Amarteifio, died testate in 1954 leaving seven children by two wives. By a will dated July 1947, he appointed the plaintiff, his eldest son, as executor and made all his children beneficiaries. One estate asset was building No. 602/RL 3, then leased to U.A.C. Clause 6 of the will directed that rents accruing from the property be distributed annually among the devisees, but that the testator’s wife, Rosina Mansah Amarteifio, should first be paid £20 out of the annual rent, with the balance to be shared equally among the other devisees. After Rosina’s death, the defendants, being her children, claimed that her entitlement under clause 6 translated into 20% of the rent as it appreciated over time, while the plaintiff contended that the clause entitled her only to a fixed sum of £20 at all times. The originating summons therefore sought the court’s interpretation of clause 6. Portion of judgment: “The plaintiff therefore comes by an originating summons seeking that the court gives clause 6 its true and meaningful interpretation.”

JUDGMENT OF STRIGGNER-SCOTT J. In his lifetime Bob Amarteifio (deceased) had seven children, it would appear by two different wives, the plaintiff being the son of the one wife, and the defendants the children of another wife called Rosina Amarteifio (also deceased). In his will dated July 1947, and admitted to probate in 1954, the year of his death, Bob Amarteifio appointed the plaintiff, his eldest son, an executor under the will, and all his children beneficiaries under the said will. One of the assets forming part of his estate was a building designated as 602/RL 3. At the time of his death, the testator, Bob Amarteifio, had leased the said building to U.A.C. By clause 6 of his will, he directed that the balance of rents accruing from his property annually should be distributed equally between the devisees under his will—that is his children — but not until his wife Rosina Amarteifio, the defendants’ mother had been paid 20 pounds of such rents annually. It is the plainti...